|
this is getting curiouser and curiouser.
with respect to the op: while i doubt that anything like a definitive claim could possible be made about whether this tomb is or is not that of "the" jesus--but i confess that i really quite hope that it IS the tomb of The Man, his wife and child--not least because that would destabilize the relations between the main gospels and some of their gnostic contemporaries. i am pretty sympathetic to gnosticism (well, some kinds of it) and thought that almost every reason augustine outlined to oppose gnosticism--particularly the problems that system posed for social regulation--were in a way virtues. the wrong variant of christianity won with the conversion of constantine.
other point:
jorgelito's post is interesting, i think.
first in the choice of the term "outing" with reference to his christianity--why that term? i find it more than passing strange.
in terms of the "anti-christian" stuff: i dont see it that way--i see a great diversity of positions, some of which are amenable to active questioning of believers themselves (as in why do you believe this...) and many others that are not.
one fairly obvious element that cuts across this (but even here, there is little consistency) is that most have had at least some experience of christianity and have broekn with it--and this for a variety of reasons. it seems to me that this break is not easy, particularly if in breaking with christianity you are breaking with signficant elements of your own frame of reference when you were younger. in these situations--and there are alot of them, if you read the various debates about atheism etc, of late--there is obviously a ton of affect from a variety of sources that gets displaced onto christianity---does this mean that the attitudes expressed are "anti-christian"?
i dont understand what "anti-christian" actually means.
would any expression of non-belief be anti-christian?
where does anti-christian stop and start?
there is a tendency within some christian communities to see in all expressions of beliefs that are not consistent with their own evidence of "anti-christian" attitudes--all of it gets associated with satan, yes?
and from that association, what alternatives are possible?
being-in-the-world is cast as warfare between two parties and everyone is of one party or the other.
this is consistent, cutting across all denominations--what varies is the centrality of this position in a larger worldview--not all denominations make this notion of spiritual warfare the absolute center of their views--but some do--fundamentalist protestants in the us are particularly committed to it, it seems (from my experience as a kid with some of these groups, it IS central)
it seems to me that many christian denominations operate from an assumption of hegemony and either will not or cannot adjust to being in a pluralist context--because within such a context, this notion of spritual warfare pitting the "good" (christians) against "evil" (everyone else) is wholly dysfunctional.
but hey, that's just my opinion, man.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|